User talk:Tkinias/arch20060612

Sorry, didn't mean to start an edit war -- I hate those -- but I didn't want you to go to far without further thought. The standard on the English wikipedia is that things should be in English if possible, or an anglicised version. We've previously agreed (I think) to allow French spellings such as "duc" and "comte" (because they are slightly different concepts in France), but the use of the French ordinal, eg 7eme, seems to be taking it a bit far. But perhaps you disagree. We should probably have another debate on the relevant talk page: Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (names and titles). In fact, I'll go and start it right now. Deb 11:18, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Yes, sorry about that -- I must have mistaken you for an unnamed user. I'm putting my glasses on now. Deb 11:25, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Alsace/Lorraine

Thanks for the clarification. I didn't pick up the French-German usage as a bias. Makes a lot of sense (I'm just a biologist, not a historian). Guettarda 13:43, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Image:Blason-noailles.png

Hello Tkinias, I'm very happy to see that you like my the coat of arms I have drawn for the Noailles-Family and that you use it for the en-WP, but please don't forget to give me credit. You know that this must be done under the GFDL. :-) Greetings, AnathemaTM 14:27, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Stamp images

While the design may be copyright, an image of the physical stamp is not, any more than car companies would jointly own copyright on a photograph of a busy street, or artists own the pictures of one's own home if paintings are visible on the wall. Admittedly, some copyright holders are keen to extend their rights in this way, but it's certainly not in our interest to help them. (User:Alex756 had useful advice on this point, can't seem to find it now.) Stan 06:18, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The issue has been somewhat debated in the past, long enough ago that I don't remember where it's stored. I suppose it's worth thinking about creating a "stamp" template appropriate for all such adhesive labels, conceptually similar to the "bookcover" template, although it would lump together indubitably-PD images with ones where the governments are known to be trying to make an extra buck off them. Ironically, the French WP has quite a few French stamp images, but no consistency on how they're tagged. Stan 06:44, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Dreyfus Affair

Thanks for the Simple English version of mine you added to. I never understood that it was in fact an anti-Semite problem, but now its soo much clearer. I may even start up the anti-Semitism page on Simple English--Wonderfool 16:07, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Category:British misuse of drugs act

You suggested that the capitalization of this category should be changed. If you still think so, please list it separately at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion. The consensus for Category:U.S. controlled substances law seems to have been to keep it, so that discussion has been removed from the page.

Thanks for your input in this—we tend to have a hard time getting folks to weigh in at CfD, so someone who knows about the subject is always particularly useful! -[[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 18:19, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Possible unfree images : Rafinesque

I gave an answer to your request on the page : Possible unfree images. The copyright tag should be {{PD-USGov}}, if you can agree. JoJan 18:54, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the great work on icthyology. It is a subject where Wikipedia is weak, and your contributions are greatly appreciated. Danny 03:31, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias is a wiki-project that is intended to counter the European and American bias of many of our articles and to cover subject matter that is missing in Wikipedia. There is a lot of information on the page and its associated Talk page. Danny 03:47, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Huh?

I don't understand your message on my talk page. What edits of yours did I revert? [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality/^talk]] 16:56, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)

References

I noticed that you changed the Southern platyfish references to a different format. The previous format follows the guidelines in Wikipedia:Cite sources. It is important that when citing these sources that we leave in the date and not rely on links which can change. Please don't change these to the less useful format that is only valid for an HTML version of Wikipedia. When we go to print, we need the full references. -- Ram-Man 14:10, Dec 1, 2004 (UTC)

With regards to your comment, I agree that the Fishbase and ITIS references should have links to their respective Wikipedia articles. The ITIS references (in the format I've been using) already has that, but I suppose I failed to do that for Fishbase, but that is easily remedied (see Southern platyfish). I still feel that we definitely should leave as much information in the ITIS and FishBase references as possible, not only because it is Wikipedia policy, but because the individual articles should be allowed to live by themselves. What I'd prefer would be some automatic way in Wikipedia code for us to cite articles, but until we get that, we should leave a citation that has the maximum amount of information. On top of that, the FishBase reference somewhat follows the recommended citation guideline that their site tells us to use. It should be noted that even if the link goes out of date, the rest of the information still is valid. It is my understanding that at least in the case of FishBase the information is published in forms other than the internet, maybe even in print form. I'd prefer it if we could keep using a similar format until a better solution can be reached. I would be more than happy to participate in a fish project if you lead the way! -- Ram-Man 22:00, Dec 1, 2004 (UTC)

FWIW, if you are concerned with the work that it takes to use the more detailed citations, you can let others (such as myself) replace them later. But I don't think we should replace the citations that roughly follow the guidelines without voting on a different idea. I suppose the project would be a good way to help with that. -- Ram-Man 22:03, Dec 1, 2004 (UTC)

I'll more closely review the WikiProject later, but I added a long comment on citation to the talk page comparing your suggestion with APA- and MLA-style citations as well as what I was using before. Check it out, and I'll monitor that page from now on instead of discussing it here. -- Ram-Man 03:19, Dec 2, 2004 (UTC)

Stamp databases

Typo, that should be "World Postal Issues Database". [1] has some description, but I think the data itself is gradually disappearing from the net as websites go away. They had about 50K stamps described in all, but database design was too weak - you have to be able to do things like describe Angolan or Haitian multiple overprints precisely. I do it with a generic C program that runs on various systems, been tinkering with it for about 10 years off and on. The key has been to make the program pretty smart, so data entry is very abbreviated, with lots of automated checking and default fillin. Also, it's designed to work well with incomplete data. I'm interested in getting more visibility for the whole thing, biggest obstacle is how to make collaboration work (your point to Etu about edit wars over colors is a perfect example). Stan 06:42, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Image:IsisAndHorus20BC.JPG

Hey there. Can you verify the legal status of this image? There's no license tag and the source site you list doesn't have any permissions info I can find. —Tkinias 01:29, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Try [2] at the base of the page CheeseDreams 07:10, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I've also seen the images elsewhere on the web. For example, on university handouts, so I'm guessing that the actual images are generally available. At least one of the 2 derives from an expedition financed by the "University of Michigan". I'm from the UK, so I'm not able to contact the University to check out the precise status of the images, but I doubt its possible to copyright a 1st century BC wall painting? CheeseDreams 08:09, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Project Fishes

I became interested in your fish project, and so I decided to start writing about some obscure fishes. However, the first article I attempted was problematic - the genus Erpetoichthys has only one species, the reedfish. Am I supposed to write an article at both places, or redirect Erpetoichthys to reedfish (similarly, the page on the order Polypteriformes redirects to the common family name bichir)? ugen64 03:34, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

IP information

Thank you. Jayjg 18:11, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Unverified images

Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:

• Image:IronMaidenNumberoftheBeastalbumcover.jpg.jpg

I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License, {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 04:38, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

Obsolete, marked {{ifd}}. —Tkinias 18:33, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

• Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
• Multi-Licensing Guide
• Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Thymallus and Grayling

I'm confused about why you moved the article from Grayling to Thymallus and then created a separate stub at Grayling. Seems rather odd since it appears all of the Thymallus are known as Graylings. Do you expect that the new stub can expand into something that is not covered in the full article? I would think the main article should have been left at Grayling since that is the most common English name for the fishes, which is standard Wikipedia naming convention. older≠wiser 19:56, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

OK, Thanks for the explanation. I guess I only saw the initial stage of edits. older≠wiser 02:22, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)

I must say it would have been agreeable to have found an explanatory note on the article's talk page: It was a bit of a shock to check my watchlist and find my work had been relocated, riven and reworked so radically. I had written the article (and I admit it was a bit basic) about the subfamily as a whole because I felt that was the best way to treat it; while I agree the move was favourable from a systematist's point of view, I think most end users would have benefitted more from the article being under the general title "grayling" and having the overview of the subfamily presented as it had been. Thymallus thymallus could have been given its own article under Grayling (species): this is the scheme Seglea favoured for a similar situation at flashlight fish. Granted it's not pretty, but a common name in place of scientific nomenclature is always the best option (again, IMO) when the end user is considered.

That said, I'm not about to do any refactoring or page moves of my own: I'm really not the argumentative type. I'll leave you to your new standardisation and "untangling" scheme, even if I don't completely agree with it. I might suggest, however, that Wikipedia is not meant to assume FishBase's role, and that occasionally it may be best to compromise hierarchical precision for the sake of the layman. I am curious as to why ITIS references are even bothered with when it comes to fish taxonomy: From my experience researching the fishes I've written articles about, FishBase appears to be the most up-to-date, and many taxa (of all levels, it seems) listed under ITIS have long since been synonymised or rendered invalid. It seems a bit odd to list FishBase and ITIS references together when they're so often at odds with each other. This is merely an observation, not a challenge of your standardisation scheme. I've said enough, so I'll just say finally that I do sincerely appreciate all the positive work you've been doing on Wikipedia's fish articles. I knew you'd turn out to be a great addition to the project when I saw how you cleaned up the sorry mess that was Gambusia. And hey, congrats on becoming an admin! -- Hadal 03:51, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Congratulatons!

Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 03:50, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Fishy names

You may be amused by the discussion on Talk:USS Capitaine (SS-336). There's plenty more names like Grayling to sort out.

In your flag research, did you happen to find out what jack/ensign the Turkish Navy uses?

—wwoods 03

23, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Grayling, etc. continued

Oh, that's fine: I somewhat regret distracting you from your work, but I do prefer the revised layout. I know things would be easier if we just stuck with systematic names as a rule, but I can't help but think of the clueless users who don't know their whitefish from their bluefish. I suppose it was my own bias which made your first revisions so controversial to me: I normally work on the order or family level when writing up taxa, so it seemed wrong to me to give a species authority over a generic name which could also be applied to an entire subfamily. To use a hypothetical scenario as illustration, it'd be like moving whitefish to Coregonus and replacing the genus overview with a species-specific article simply because FishBase listed one species with the official name "whitefish", with no modifier. But again, your reasoning makes just as much sense to me as my own.

Regarding the difference between Wikipedia's and FishBase's roles: I fully agree, and that's exactly the sort of specialized data I try to include. My earlier articles (e.g. butterflyfish) are rather unstructured, but to me they flow nicely and certainly have more meaningful info (from a layman's perspective) than FishBase would seem to offer. I've tended to focus on marine groups, but I do have the three volume Baensch Aquarium Atlas set. Lots of hobbyist info for freshwater and brackish fish, and as far as I know the books are regarded as excellent references. (I used to be an avid aquarist.) Perhaps I should start utilising them in Wikipedia.

I've spread myself a bit thin by joining three projects, but I did manage to churn out another fish article tonight: Lanternfish. I'm actually surprisd it hadn't been written yet. Does it look okay to you? (I'm almost afraid of not meeting your project's standards, though I consciously omitted the ITIS reference in this case. I'll just pretend the site's unreachable, which is the truth at least half of the time.) Cheers, -- Hadal 04:40, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Pangaea

Ah, well, I'm just always trying to improve existing images if I feel I can. Thanks. :) — Kieff | Talk 02:33, Dec 22, 2004 (UTC)

Tucson, Arizona and more

Hi. I saw that you voted on the RFC regarding Tucson, Arizona, and I thought you might be interested in commenting on a broader application of the formatting to other city articles. The discussion (for now) is at Talk: Tucson, Arizona#Other Arizona and nearby cities. (It might get moved to WikiProject Cities, if there's interest in doing so.) Thanks! kmccoy (talk) 01:30, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Image:Aircraft-metfink.jpg and Image:72ReliantSuperRobin.jpg

User:TPK afaik got permission to use images from [3] on Wikipedia earlier this month. See Talk:List of closed Melbourne railway stations. With Image:72ReliantSuperRobin.jpg, I got permission to use it (but not modify it) on Wikipedia. Has there been some change in policy or something? Somebody in the WWW 01:49, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

WikiProject political figures

You signed up for Wikipedia:WikiProject Political figures which has been inactive for a few months, but may be restarted now. Are you interested in joining? Academic Challenger 02:20, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Pickeral

• There is actually a third subspecies of the American Pickeral, the chain pickeral. They are quite abundant http://www.dnr.state.md.us/fisheries/education/chainpickerel/chainpickerel.html and http://www.landbigfish.com/fish/fish.cfm?ID=42

Skeeter08865

Reopening a never-healed wound

Talk:Latin You really should vote for your own proposal. There's no rule against it. It's clear that you support the proposed move, but I can't fill in your vote for you. If you do vote there, it will make it 7-11. That means 63% consensus in favor of a move --- squeaking us through, although I would desire at least 70% either way before the voting is closed. --Jpbrenna 22:40, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Image:US ensign 50 stars.png

Image deletion warning

Image:US ensign 50 stars.png has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. If you feel that this image should not be deleted, please go there to voice your opinion.

Zscout370 (Sound Off) 02:30, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

XGSC images to commons

hello TKinias,

i want to take the XGSC images to commons - there will be no problem, or? (please ecscuse my english) --Commons:User:Kristjan' 10:00, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

intertempe i moved the images to commons: commons:Category:XGSC images. --Commons:User:Kristjan' 11:45, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Image:Mexico flag small.png has been listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Mexico flag small.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

--Sherool (talk) 17:39, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Image:Canada naval jack.png

You uploaded an image of the Canadian naval jack a few months ago. It is implied in the file summary that you drew the image yourself. Is that correct? David Newton 00:36, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Image:Gnome system.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Gnome system.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

This image could be replaced by Image:Nuvola apps mycomputer.png on Template:Compu-stub, to follow the convention of using Nuvola icons for stub templates where available. It looks nicer and will be one less file that needed to stay on the servers. Seahen 11:59, 13 April 2006 (UTC)